Mowatt

A poster mentioned in another thread he thought he was not fully fit i.e carrying an injury.

His movement does look restricted at times especially compared wit the payer he was at Barnsley 2 years ago.
 
Badonde said:
Sick of us ending up with lazy players with poor attitude.
Bet he's on at least £30k per week.
Shame he seems to have decided he doesn't need to try anymore
Click to expand...
We will not be paying £30k/week now to squad midfielders - we supposedly offered Friend £13k/week.
 

Choudhury was on a reported £61k per week at Leicester. We were in for him.​

We were desperate when he went to Watford.
Mowatt was probably the highest regarded free agent in last summer's transfer market.
WBA will have had to pay him £30k per week minimum I expect - we will now be paying this salary.
 
I for one am astonished that a bloke on the bench for midtable wba hasn’t driven us to the top of the table.

Garbage at Leeds for years. One good season at Barnsley when they played hoofball. Garbage at wba. Thank goodness it’s only a loan. Another terribly indictment of Kieran Scott and his inept transfer policy.
 
Same with every player we sign. First he's a 'great signing'. Then he 'looks like just what we need' and then a few weeks later he's 'shocking', 'dreadful' or 'awful'. If I could be bothered and/or had the time I'd look back at and quote what was being said on here when he signed but I can't be and haven't.
 
Absolutely crap.

I thought he was supposed to have a decent set piece on him as well but he doesn’t even get to take them, or if he does they’re also crap.
 
Badonde said:

Choudhury was on a reported £61k per week at Leicester. We were in for him.​

We were desperate when he went to Watford.
Mowatt was probably the highest regarded free agent in last summer's transfer market.
WBA will have had to pay him £30k per week minimum I expect - we will now be paying this salary.
Click to expand...
Why?

Under finance rules we pay what we can afford and what WBA would accept sometimes teams don't get the full wages covered- if we paid £1.5m on average for our squad players, our players wage bill would around £36m. (24 times £1.5m - £1.5m been £30k a week).

WBA bought and paid him with parachute payments, hence they can afford more. If he was not going to start for them, they might have felt to get say £15k to £20k would helped them which is more the going rate for a Championship player.

Watford have parachute payments they can afford to pay £30k/week for players and have a wage bill of £36m and over. My guess is money had something to do with him going to Watford i.e they could pay more of his wages.
 
18MFC76 said:
Well we've just paid 5 or 6 million for a couple of strikers. One is a bench warmer and the other is now in with the u23s. Based on that we really could be paying anything.
Click to expand...
I agree at present it doesn't look the best £5.5m spent, but that money was fees, not wages i.e we own their contracts. Opposed to spending £5.5m on wages. Because of their lack of experience and age, the wages will be not great.

Both are 21? and need to develop - it looks like (from clubs actions) the development required is more than they planned..

To me another more developed striker should have come in or Forss/Hoppe is used more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top